This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

In response to the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s filing of a Freedom of Information Act request last October, the FAA has finally released its new drone authorization list. The foundation has been particularly keen to learn the circumstances under which the Department of Homeland Security provides drones to different law enforcement agencies across the country. With drone technology proliferating much faster than the ability to track it, it is fair to say that current methods of enacting and enforcing regulatory policy can not possibly keep up. Drones are the first among many new technologies that, with a single broad stroke, can create a microcosm of conflicting new governance. Any equitable oversight should only seek to mandate adherence to principle, rather than to detail as traditionally enforced by a narrow-minded and prosecutorial zealot.

Among the 20 new additions to the original FAA list of 61 are several universities, sheriff’s offices, and even an Indian Tribal agency. The University of California school system has submissions for campuses at David and at Merced, while the Berkeley campus is instead looking to towards banning drones altogether. While you might expect to find more flakes at a place like Berkeley than on your breakfast table, they do raise the point as to who is actually in charge of the immediate airspace. Elsewhere, even larger entities are seeking blanket restrictions. A Virginia House panel has approved a two-year moratorium on drone use within the state.

It is slightly disturbing that military-quality drones are now available from China for around $1500. They are being marketed by 阿里巴巴集团 (the Alibaba group), which also happens to be the world’s largest online business trading platform. A direct result of the astounding pace of drone innovation is that new legislation will end up being incident driven, and as a result severely limiting. If it is not otherwise restricted in duration from the outset, it will probably overshoot in scope, and then have to be back-adjusted with confounding new law.

In a way that the ubiquitous gun regulation issue cannot, drone regulation must perhaps draw greater distinction between both geography and community. The incredible creations found within full-turbine RC flying groups may have to be tempered in scale and power. In a former world where howling dogs, blaring stereos and unbridled Harleys affirm daily the dominance of an individual’s right to disturb the peace over your own right to it, the leisure drone operator should increasingly expect to find his or her playful liberties curtailed for the common good.

If there is any certainty in the new drone arms race it is that there will be pushback from a new breed of sky pirates. The realization that propellers are not the most efficient way to apply power to the air, particularly at the low speed regime, has led to new drone designs that more closely mimic birds. The autonomous flying vehicle in the video above is not computer generated; it’s a video of the Smartbird, made by Festo. With federal fines up to a quarter million dollars and two years imprisonment for killing a bald eagle, anyone looking to take out a mechanized flapper had better look twice before they shoot.

Perhaps the biggest casualty to drone restrictions will be loss of a dream for an entire generation of now-aging Speed Racer fans. With an extremely well thought out arrangement of tools, Speed Racer had a button for nearly every emergency placed right in the center of his car’s steering wheel. The largest and most useful button was the one in the center labelled “G,” the homing robot. Having a remote rescue drone could get you out of some pretty tough spots if the need ever arises. In creating new drone laws, let us hope that all the great things the technology has to offer will not be taken off the table by behavior of a few rogues.